Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A political science model based on rational choice used to explain why citizens do or do not vote. The alternative equation is V = pB + D > C. Where for voting to occur the (P)robability the vote will matter "times" the (B)enefit of one candidate winning over another combined with the feeling of civic (D)uty, must be greater than the (C)ost of ...
The mythological judgement of Paris required selecting from three incomparable alternatives (the goddesses shown).. Decision theory or the theory of rational choice is a branch of probability, economics, and analytic philosophy that uses the tools of expected utility and probability to model how individuals would behave rationally under uncertainty.
The rational choice model, also called rational choice theory refers to a set of guidelines that help understand economic and social behaviour. [1] The theory originated in the eighteenth century and can be traced back to the political economist and philosopher Adam Smith . [ 2 ]
A social choice function, sometimes called a voting system in the context of politics, is a rule that takes an individual's complete and transitive preferences over a set of outcomes and returns a single chosen outcome (or a set of tied outcomes). We can think of this subset as the winners of an election, and compare different social choice ...
In other words, the system must always make some choice, and cannot simply "give up" when the voters have unusual opinions. Without this assumption, majority rule satisfies Arrow's axioms by "giving up" whenever there is a Condorcet cycle. [9] Non-dictatorship — the system does not depend on only one voter's ballot. [3]
Matrimonial regimes, or marital property systems, are systems of property ownership between spouses providing for the creation or absence of a marital estate and if created, what properties are included in that estate, how and by whom it is managed, and how it will be divided and inherited at the end of the marriage.
Some voting rules are difficult to explain to voters in a way they can intuitively understand, which may undermine public trust in elections. [8] [failed verification] For example, while Schulze's rule performs well by many of the criteria above, it requires an involved explanation of beatpaths. Ease of voting.
The authors analyze the traditional political science approach to voting systems, including majority voting as the standard as opposed to the unanimity rule. They show that none of those systems is perfect, since there is always a tradeoff: a simple majority-based system imposes varying amounts of both external costs and decision-making costs